<p>So my senior friend from x college came over a few days ago to visit. We had a great time and for some reason, we ended up betting each other to see how accurate CC chances are. So basically you guys chance based off of the info given (his stats. he's gunna type it up)...and after a few days, I'll reveal which schools he got accepted into or rejected from.</p>
<p>gender: male
Area: CA bay area
HS: very competitive
ethnicity: asian
income: well above average</p>
<p>UW: 3.78
W: N/A---Took 6 APs and all honors
SAT:2110
ACT:35
APs: all 5 in junior year (stats, psych, bio).....4 and 5 in senior (Calc, Environmental science, physics B)</p>
<p>EC:
Founder and secretary of Team HBV chapter at my school</p>
<p>a few summer activities here and there (summer academies like COSMOS and research with professor)</p>
<p>president of 2 more clubs...forgot which. Eh. the usual. Hosted a few events. Donations and fundraisers.</p>
<p>Varsity captain of Track and Field</p>
<p>200+ volunteer hours</p>
<p>ect ect...nothing magnificent. </p>
<p>Majors in :Stats and psych.</p>
<p>Applied to:
Northwestern
Stanford
Brown
Rice
UCLA, UCB, UCSD, UCD, UCI
Columbia
Yale
....I think that's it</p>
<p>IMO I wrote some pretty awesome personal statements and whatnot. Good recs....</p>
<p>Alright guys. That's it. Let's see how spot on you guys are in determining which schools he got into.</p>
<p>Your sample size needs to be more than 20 (in this case, 20 replies) to be solid evidence for any hypothesis. If you’re doing a research on the accuracies of chancing, this is not the way to go. You won’t be likely to get above 20 replies. (Though it varies widely from people to people, so actually 20 people * 20 replies each is more indicative) A better way in collecting sample data is to go to the threads with people posting results, click on their profile, and check if they had any “chance me” threads before they know their results. I have not done this before, but I believe it’s likely to be astonishingly inaccurate.</p>
<p>Why Stanford Accept? I’m inferring that the underlying status quo is that CC chancing is inaccurate. It could be the other way around, in which case the following does not hold valid. Nevertheless, if my assumption was correct, we could deduce that there is a likelihood that the author is expecting the repliers to predict wrongly. If we were to assume the author understands the normal behavior at CC chancing, we would thus expect that the author is expecting the repliers to predict as usual, in addition to being wrong. Thus, perhaps the real result is something unusual. Therefore I randomly chose a top school and put Accept on it.</p>
<p>@Skyrior very nice. Interesting how you combined stats and psych together in that post. I would say that my sample size would have to be > or = to 30 for it to be normal, which requires more work of going to other people’s thread and doing more bland "chance me"s in order to get a reply. but what has to be done must be done. Thanks for the reply and comprehensive reasoning. </p>
<p>Northwestern- accepted
Stanford- rejected
Brown- rejected
Rice- accepted
UCLA- rejected
UCB- accepted
UCSD- accepted
UCD- accepted
UCI- accepted
Columbia- rejected
Yale- rejected
Although I would not be surprised if he could accepted to one of the IVYs since they are such lottery schools… these are just based on the statistics, a lot else plays in</p>
<p>@PettyOfficer haha. This is legitimate. My friend is back in x college.The reason he came to visit was because his job interview was near my hometown. And his visit also coincided with Chinese New Year. So we had some time to reconnect and one conversation led to another, so that’s how we ended up placing this bet. He used to be a CC chance me addict. haha</p>
<p>Northwestern- Accepted
Stanford- Reject
Brown- Accepted
Rice- Accepted
UCLA, UCB, UCSD, UCD, UCI- Accepted
Columbia- Rejected
Yale- I’m going with accepted because no one else believed in you </p>
I agree with Skyrior. Since one of you thinks the CC chancing system is inaccurate, your friend likely got into a school (or maybe multiple schools) we wouldn’t expect him to with his limiting factors (the meh ECs and maybe the UW GPA). I’m guessing the super selective colleges he got into were Northwestern and Columbia simply because I have a gut feeling about them. Probably incorrect and a bad way to guess, but…
Normally people don’t group all the UCs together (sometimes they do do the similar ones though, like UCSD/UCD, UCSB/UCI, UCLA/UCB, etc). I’m thinking there’s a reason why he did - perhaps either he got into all the UCs or got rejected from all of them. I’m guessing it’s accepted, since I can’t imagine UCSD, UCD, and UCI rejecting him.
I’m pretty sure I know the area you’re from, based on your own past chance threads. If your friend is visiting, that means he probably doesn’t go to a college near where you live (aka not in driving or <em>cough cough</em> walking distance). If your friend got into that college near where you live, I think he’d probably enroll there. So I don’t think he got into that college.
For the rest of my guesses I just used normal CC chancing methods.</p>
<p>Perhaps I’m reading into your post way too much. Anyways, this was fun to do. Please post what schools he got into! I’m really curious.</p>
</p>